Flight Safety Information
August 22, 2013 - No. 173
In This Issue
Pilot's Actions In July Crash Face Review
FAA Preparing To Follow Canada's Call To Broaden Honeywell ELT Inspections
Disruptive first-class flier forces Delta flight to Alaska
Firing A Pilot For Raising Safety Concerns? Ryanair Should Know Better
ICAO certifies Nigeria, 13 other African countries' airspace safe
Number of birds hitting planes doubles to 2,200 in three years (UK)
Think ARGUS PROS
NTSB Communications Course
Mitsubishi Aircraft delays regional jet delivery to 2017
No One Wants To Be A Drone Pilot, U.S. Air Force Discovers
From parrots to panties, what travelers leave behind on airplanes
GRADUATE RESEARCH SURVEY
Pilot's Actions In July Crash Face Review
Pilot May Have Throttled Back Engine Too Soon, People Familiar With Inquiry Say
By ANDY PASZTOR
Seconds before the botched landing of a Southwest Airlines Inc. LUV jet last month at New York's La
Guardia Airport, the captain was concerned about touching down too far along the runway and may
have throttled back the engines prematurely, according to people familiar with the investigation.
The preliminary indications of what led the aircraft to land on its nosegear, causing it to collapse and
substantially damaging the Boeing BA 737, still have to be validated by investigators, these officials
said.
The National Transportation Safety Board previously said the captain, in an unusual move, abruptly
took over control at an altitude of about 400 feet. But the probe's latest focus appears to provide the
strongest explanation yet for why she opted to suddenly take over from the first officer, and how a
routine approach turned into a high-profile crash that temporarily closed the airport.
Ten of the 149 people aboard were hurt in the July 22 incident. The flight took off from Nashville,
Tenn., that afternoon.
The nose of the plane pitched down during the last four seconds of the approach, when it should
have remained slightly raised.
When the plane landed, the top of the landing gear, with only the right axle still attached, penetrated
up through the floor of the bay, into an area holding electronic systems that help with operation and
navigation of the plane.
Investigators have found no engine or other airplane malfunctions to account for the maneuver.
The NTSB, according these, people, is particularly interested in the captain's flight-control commands
and her interaction with the first officer during the final 100 feet of the descent before the crash.
Southwest hasn't found any similar accident scenarios in previous years and has concluded the La
Guardia crash doesn't pose any systemic hazards, Timothy Logan, the airline's top flight risk-
management official, told an industry conference Wednesday in Vancouver.
The safety board hasn't turned up any training problems or deficiencies in the employment history of
the captain, a 13-year veteran who has more that 8,000 hours flying in Boeing 737s.
The captain had landed only once before at La Guardia, according to the safety board. The first
officer had about 1,100 hours of experience flying 737 jets and had flown into the airport six times
previously in 2013, the NTSB has said.
The probe has been delayed partly because the pilots weren't interviewed until about a week after
the accident.
The investigation is further complicated by the fact that both the captain and first officer filed reports
about what happened under the airline's nonpunitive, voluntary safety-reporting system, according
to people familiar with the details. Specifics from such reports normally are off limits to federal air-
safety officials and particularly regulators.
The crew was making a visual approach, had turned off automated flight-control systems at the
proper time, and also was relying on an instrument-landing system as a backup.
A major question remains why the captain, once she became concerned about the safety of the
approach so close to the ground, didn't follow industrywide guidance to abandon the descent and
climb away from the field.
Southwest has suffered accidents over the years stemming from planes running off the ends of slick
or snowy runways, but the July mishap wasn't caused by any traction or braking problems.
More recently, according to people familiar with the details of Southwest's safety programs, company
experts have focused on training pilots to ensure that they reach the landing touchdown point at the
proper speed.
Transferring control during the descent's final phase, by itself, may have posed procedural and
teamwork challenges. There's no indication of cockpit disputes, but independent safety experts said
the first officer could have been startled by the change of plans barely a few seconds before
touchdown.
The safety board "is delving into details of how you actually make that transition," according to one
person close the probe. The cockpit-voice recorder, this person added, shows "a lot of dynamics
between the two pilots."
Mr. Logan of Southwest suggested the same point in his comments to a global gathering of air-
accident investigators in Vancouver. Calling the La Guardia accident "a challenging event," he said
data gathered so far indicates "there's a lot going on" in the cockpit in the last few seconds.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324619504579027442368326028.html
Back to Top
FAA Preparing To Follow Canada's Call To Broaden Honeywell ELT Inspections
The FAA, following the actions of its Canadian counterpart, is developing an order that will require
inspections of Honeywell emergency locator transmitters (ELTs) on 22 aircraft types delivered or
retrofitted with the units, Aviation Week has learned.
The timing of the FAA's airworthiness directive's (AD's) is not clear, but once released, it will closely
resemble a Transport Canada mandate issued Aug. 15. That order, quickly adopted by the European
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), gives operators until late December to inspect Honeywell RESCU
406AF and 406AFN transmitters, as well as the ELTs' batteries and related wiring, for damage or
other fire risks.
"The FAA intends to follow the Transport Canada Civil Aviation AD with an FAA AD requiring those
same actions for U.S. operators of airplanes with those fixed Honeywell ELTs installed," the U.S.
agency says in a statement.
Regulators are acting on initial findings in the probe of a July 12 fire on an empty Ethiopian Airlines
Boeing 787 at London Heathrow Airport. Investigators suspect the fire's source was the 787's RESCU
406AFN ELT or its wiring system.
The Ethiopian Airlines incident was the first of its type.
The two Honeywell ELTs have been certified as buyer- or supplier-furnished equipment (BFE/SFE) on
11 models, including most current-production Airbus and Boeing aircraft. They are available for
retrofit on 18 models, including seven in the BFE/SFE category. Honeywell says it has delivered
about 3,000 of the 406AFNs and 2,500 406AFs.
Despite the ELTs being available on the most popular airliners in service-including the Airbus A320
and A330, and the Boeing 737NG, 767, and 777-the inspection orders have hit Boeing operators
much harder. Boeing confirms that some 1,100-1,200 of its aircraft have been delivered with one of
the two ELTs, while the number of Airbus aircraft affected is understood to be fewer than 100.
Two U.K. Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) recommendations made shortly after the
Ethiopian Airlines incident was the catalyst for these ADs. AAIB suggested that the FAA require
checks of 787s with the ELT in question, and consider a broader mandate for other aircraft with one
of the two ELT models installed.
The FAA moved first, ordering checks on 787s in late July. EASA followed with a similar mandate
before adopting the broader Transport Canada measure.
The FAA's more extensive order could differ from the Canadian directive. U.S. regulations require
ELTs for many types of operations, but not scheduled airline service. This gives the FAA room to offer
airlines the option of deactivating the units to mitigate ELT-related fire risks, as the agency did in its
787 AD.
U.S. operators serving countries that require ELTs cannot take advantage of the deactivation option.
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/avd_08_22_2013_p01-01-
608860.xml&p=1
Back to Top
Disruptive first-class flier forces Delta flight to Alaska
ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) - A first-class passenger became so disruptive after drinking five glasses of
wine that a flight from New York to Shanghai had to be diverted to Anchorage, according to charging
documents.
Stephanie Heizmann Auerbach was charged Tuesday with interference of flight crew and members,
the Anchorage Daily News reported.
She was being held at the Hiland Mountain Correctional Center for women on Tuesday. Her
Anchorage-based attorney didn't immediately return a call for comment on Wednesday, nor did the
state Department of Corrections to verify she was still at the jail.
Auerbach, who owns the Stephanie & Co. fashion company in Shanghai, was a passenger on Delta
Airlines flight 181, which was en route from New York to China via Detroit.
Charging documents, which include information from FBI agents' interviews with crew and other
passengers, say Auerbach, 47, drank five glasses of wine within the first 90 minutes of the 7,100
mile trip from Detroit to Shanghai. The documents say she began walking up and down the aisle,
yelling profanities and climbing on seats. Passengers told the FBI she also sneaked drinks out of the
galley when the crew wasn't watching.
A flight attendant asked her to return to her seat, A1, five times and she declined, the charging
documents say.
"Auerbach spilled alcohol on passenger A.J. and grabbed A.J.'s wrist to place a bracelet on A.J. (She)
declined to wear the bracelet and asked Auerbach to leave her alone," the documents say. "In
response, Auerbach swore at A.J. and demanded that a flight attendant give her A.J.'s name. A flight
attendant intervened and returned Auerbach to Auerbach's assigned seat. Auerbach alarmed A.J. and
it appeared to A.J. that Auerbach was attempting to gain access to the pilot."
Auerbach was issued a written notice notifying her that she had refused an order from the flight crew
regarding safety. The documents say she then hit the attendant with the notice, approached the
flight attendant and demanded off the flight.
The pilot, who was only identified by the initials W.R., intervened and asked Auerbach if she would
follow the crew's instructions. She declined, and the pilot then diverted the flight to Anchorage.der
from the flight crew regarding safety. The documents say she then hit the attendant with the notice,
approached the flight attendant and demanded off the flight.
"The flight crew is in charge of the safety of the aircraft and the passengers on board, and they did
what they thought was necessary in this case," Delta spokeswoman Leslie Scott said.
Anchorage Ted Stevens International Airport police had to board the plane and remove Auerbach,
and the charges claim she was "physically combative." She was detained and charged.
Two children traveling with Auerbach were allowed to continue to Shanghai on the condition their
father would pick them up at the airport.
Back to Top
Firing A Pilot For Raising Safety Concerns? Ryanair Should Know Better
By: John Goglia
Very little makes me cringe more, as a long-time accident investigator and safety advocate, than
hearing that a senior airline pilot was fired by his company for raising safety concerns. Not only fired,
but media reports indicate that Ryanair is planning to sue him for defaming the company by raising
these concerns on TV. Nothing could have a more chilling effect on employees raising safety
concerns than seeing one of their own both get fired and sued.
Let me say right off the bat, that I don't know if the pilot's safety claims are true or not. But in my
experience - and I have been in the aviation safety business for more than forty years, with the
NTSB, as an independent safety auditor and as a union safety official - it is the very rare airline
employee that raises intentionally false claims of safety problems to get back at his employer. My
experience is that if an aviation employee raises a concern, there's usually something to it.
Occasionally, their concerns prove to be unfounded or the problem is not as significant as the
employee might believe, but almost never do they spring from pure malice or an intent to harm the
company.
I was shocked to read the vehemence with which Ryanair apparently reacted to this pilot's concerns.
Particularly surprising because Europeans have been in the forefront of establishing non-punitive
systems for addressing safety concerns. We have known for many years now that one of the most
critical ways to assure safety in the aviation system is to tap into the information held by frontline
aviation workers. And you can't get much more frontline than pilots - who are likely to have
information that no one else in the company has. In order to get that information, they have to be
able to bring it forward and have it addressed without fear of punitive actions. Firing employees for
raising safety issues raises concerns about a company's commitment to a proactive safety culture.
While no one wants to hear their company disparaged on national TV, the better reaction from a
safety perspective might be for Ryanair to simply respond with the technical data to disprove the
pilot's claims, if it has that data, rather than sending such a chilling message to its employees.
Mr. Goglia is an independent aviation safety consultant and Adjunct Professor at Vaughn College of
Aeronautics and Technology and regular monthly columnist for four aviation trade publications. He
was a Member of the National Transportation Safety Board and airline mechanic for more than 30
years and was also the first and only aviation mechanic to ever serve as a Board Member.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoglia/2013/08/21/firing-a-pilot-for-raising-safety-concerns-
ryanair-should-know-better/
Back to Top
ICAO certifies Nigeria, 13 other African countries' airspace safe
Murtala Muhammed International Airport
WorldStage Newsonline-- The International Civil Aviation Organisation ( ICAO), the global aviation
regulator with 200 member countries, has listed Nigeria as one of the 14 countries in Africa that has
achieved effective air safety implementation scoring above the global average of 61 percent.
This rating is contained in the ICAO 2013 Safety Report, compiled by ICAO auditors who investigated
the compliance with stipulated International safety standards by individual countries across the
world.
According to the coordinating spokesman of aviation parastatals, Mr Yakubu Dati, the ICAO 2013
Safety Report lends credence to the Category one certification granted Nigeria in 2011 by the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) of the United States, for meeting stipulated international standards
and practices on safety and security.
Dati explained that it signals the success of the Aviation Master Plan developed by the Minister of
Aviation, Princess Stella Oduah.
He said: "The vision is to make Nigerian aviation sector a world class provider of safe, secure and
comfortable air transport sector that is self sustaining and pivotal to socio-economic growth."
Meanwhile, the Nigerian Airspace Management Agency (NAMA) is set to train 96 members of its staff.
The training is part of ongoing efforts to beef up capacity and manpower requirement preparatory to
the imminent take-off of Aeronautical Information Service (AIS) automation in November,
According to the Managing Director, Engr. Mazi Nnamdi Udoh , the affected staff are to be trained in
Basic Aeronautical Information Course at the Nigerian College of Aviation Technology ( NCAT), Zaria
adding that for effective deployment of logistics, the group shall run the course concurrently in four
batches.
Addressing participants at NAMA headquarters in Lagos, Engr Udoh congratulated them for the
privilege just as he enjoined them to justify the agency's huge investment in their training by taking
their studies seriously.
The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has set November 15th 2013 as deadline for the
implementation of AIS automation worldwide and the project in Nigeria has reached advanced stage
of completion.
AIS automation when in operation would enhance air safety with pilots sending their aeronautical
messages online and this would reduce excessive telephone conversation between pilots and air
traffic controllers.
http://www.worldstagegroup.com/worldstagenew/index.php?active=news&newscid=10256&catid=27
Back to Top
Number of birds hitting planes doubles to 2,200 in three years (UK)
Strikes have caused engine fires and emergency landings, says air safety watchdog
Civil Aviation Authority figures show three 'significant' collisions in UK each week
Report details 315 'bird strike incidents' in 2011 and 2012
Serious cases have caused engines to catch fire
The number of birds colliding with planes has nearly doubled over the past few years, according to
an air safety watchdog. More than 2,200 reports such incidents were recorded last year by the Civil
Aviation Authority - almost twice the 1,299 'bird strikes' that were recorded in 2007.
The figures show that around three 'significant' collisions take place in Britain every week.
Hazard: In the most serious incidents, pilots have been forced to put out mayday messages after
birds flew into their engines, causing them to fail
Hazard: In the most serious incidents, pilots have been forced to put out mayday messages after
birds flew into their engines, causing them to fail
The most serious incidents saw pilots put out mayday messages as their engines failed.
Other scares have seen planes dumping fuel to make emergency landings and cases where engines
caught fire and fumes started to enter the cabin.
The CAA report details 315 so-called 'bird strike incidents' in 2011 and 2012 that damaged the
aircraft or created a flight safety hazard.
One of the most serious accidents involved an Airbus A321 flying out of Luton which was hit by a
flock of birds shortly after take off, forcing the pilot to shut off an engine.
Another saw an Airbus A320 having to return to Heathrow shortly after being hit by a bird.
Air strike: Flocks of birds have led to emergency landings in some places
Air strike: Flocks of birds have led to emergency landings in some places
And a passenger jet pilot declared an emergency after colliding with greenfinches as he was coming
in to land at Gatwick.
A CAA spokesman explained that pilots are now obliged to log every accident involving birds.
'If a bird strike has been submitted, which has either caused damage to the aircraft or the bird strike
has resulted in a flight safety hazard, then this would be reportable,' he said.
The most dangerous bird strike incident in recent years took place in New York when a US Airways
Airbus A320 was forced to land in the Hudson River after being hit by a large flock of birds.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2399551/Bird-strike-Number-hitting-planes-doubles-2-200-
years.html#ixzz2chVzuSOz
Back to Top
Back to Top
NTSB Communications Course
National Transportation Safety Board Washington, D.C. Public Affairs: 202-314-6100 Direct:
202-314-6219
Title
Managing Communications Following an Aircraft Accident
or Incident
Co-sponsor
Airports Council International - North America (ACI-NA)
Description
The course will teach participants what to expect in the days immediately
following an aviation accident or incident and how they can prepare for their role
with the media.
ID Code
PA302
Dates, Tuition
and Fee
October 24-25, 2013
$1034 early registration, by September 24, 2013
$1084 late registration, between September 25 and 12:00 pm (noon) ET on
October 23, 2013
$100 processing fee will be added to tuitions for all
offline applications. A tuition invoice can be ordered for a
$25 processing fee.
Note: payment must be made at time of registration.
Times
Oct. 24: 8:30 am - 5:00 pm
Oct. 25: 8:30 am - 3:00 pm
Location
NTSB Training Center * 45065 Riverside Parkway * Ashburn, Virginia 20147
Status
OPEN. Applications are now being accepted.
Apply to Attend
October 24-25, 2013
CEUs
1.3
Overview
* How the National Transportation Safety Board organizes an accident
site and what can be expected in the days after an aviation disaster
from the NTSB, FAA, other federal agencies, airline, airport, media
and local community
* Strategies for airline and airport staff to proactively manage the
communication process throughout the on-scene phase of the
investigation
* How the NTSB public affairs officers coordinate press conferences and
release of accident information and what information the
spokespersons from the airport and airline will be responsible to
provide to the media
* Making provisions for and communicating with family members of
those involved in the accident
* Questions and requests likely encountered from the airlines, airport
staff, family members, disaster relief agencies, local officials and
others
> Comments from course participants
> See the 219 organizations from 28 countries that have sent staff to attend
this course
Performance
Results
Upon completion of this course the participant will be able to:
* Be better prepared to respond to a major aviation disaster involving a
flight departing from or destined for participant's airport
* Demonstrate greater confidence in fielding on-scene questions about
the many aspects of the investigation and its participants, including
what types of specific information may be requested
* Identify the appropriate Public Affairs roles for the various
organizations involved in an accident investigation.
* Be more productive in the first few hours after an aviation disaster by
understanding which tasks are most important and why
* Perform job responsibilities more professionally and with greater
confidence given the knowledge and tools to manage the airport
communications aspect of a major aviation disaster
Who May Attend
This course is targeted to who, in the event of an aviation disaster, will need
to provide a steady flow of accurate information to media outlets and/or
other airport, federal or local authorities.
Accommodations
Area hotels and restaurants
Airports
Washington Dulles International (IAD): 10 miles
Washington Ronald Reagan National (DCA): 30 miles
Baltimore/Washington International (BWI): 60 miles
More
Information
Email TrainingCenter@ntsb.gov or call (571) 223-3900
Courses, forums and symposia are added to the schedule throughout the
year. Subscribe to the e-newsletter to learn about upcoming events and new
programs: http://www.ntsb.gov/trainingcenter/list/list_mw020207.htm
Back to Top
Mitsubishi Aircraft delays regional jet delivery to 2017
Mitsubishi Aircraft Corp President Teruaki Kawai holds a model of a Mitsubishi Regional Jet
(MRJ) after an interview with Reuters in Tokyo February 22, 2013.
TOKYO | (Reuters) - Mitsubishi Aircraft Corp, a unit of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd (7011.T), said
on Thursday it would delay the initial delivery of its regional jet to the second-quarter of 2017 to
ensure the company can meet Japanese safety regulations.
The Mitsubishi Regional Jet (MRJ), Japan's first commercial aircraft in half a century, was set to start
being delivered to customers in 2015.
Mitsubishi Aircraft CEO Teruaki Kawai said the delay was due to the company's underestimation of
the time it needed to sort out how to validate the safety of the manufacturing process of the jet and
its components, and not from any issues with specific suppliers.
A report by the Nikkei business daily had put the delays down to problems with the delivery of parts,
including engines from Pratt & Whitney.
"We were late in noticing (how long this will take), and that is largely because this is new for us,"
Kawai told a news conference. "We are confident we can meet this schedule."
Pratt & Whitney, a unit of United Technologies Corp (UTX.N), also denied there were any delays on
its part. "We are on track and on time to deliver the first engine as required by Mitsubishi's
schedule," the company said in a statement.
Mitsubishi Aircraft already has 165 firm orders for the MRJ, and this is the third time the company
has pushed back the jet's delivery schedule. The MRJ will now go on its first flight in 2015 instead of
later this year, Kawai said.
The plane, which has 70-90 seats, has a sticker price of $42 million. It aims to compete with jets
made by Brazil's Embraer (EMBR3.SA) and Canada's Bombardier (BBDb.TO). The first delivery of the
jet, developed at a cost of $1.9 billion, will go to Japanese airline ANA Holdings (9202.T).
Back to Top
No One Wants To Be A Drone Pilot, U.S. Air Force Discovers
The Air Force's drone program is too unmanned for its own good.
While the vast majority of U.S. Air Force pilots still control their aircraft from inside the cockpit,
about 8.5 percent are drone pilots who operate their vehicles remotely. That percentage is expected
to grow, but there's a problem: the Air Force can't get enough people to volunteer for the training,
according to a new report written by Air Force Colonel Bradley Hoagland for the Brookings Institution
think tank.
Here's the challenge: Drones are usually chosen for jobs that are "dirty, dangerous, or dull"-with dull
being the key word here. Some surveillance drones require round-the-clock shifts, and the very
stressful work is so time intensive that drone pilots often cannot take advantage of additional
training and education, which in turn dampens their prospects for career advancement, according to
the study.
Burnout also seems to be a major concern, as drone pilots quit at three times the rate of manned
aircraft pilots.
If the Air Force can figure out how to get more people to sign up for drone training, the problem
should self-correct: A larger pool of drone pilots would hopefully mean shorter shifts and more time
for career advancement.
One way to increase the number of drone pilots would be for the Air Force to alter its requirements
for pilots. The Air Force only allows commissioned officers to fly drones, and commissioned officers
must have a bachelor's degree in addition to technical training. By contrast, the Army allows warrant
officers, who only need a high school diploma or GED, to fly both unmanned aircraft and helicopters.
Or, it just might be that actually flying through the air will always be more awesome that piloting an
aircraft from the ground.
http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2013-08/air-force-drone-program-too-unmanned-its-own-
good
Back to Top
From parrots to panties, what travelers leave behind on airplanes
What kinds of carry-on items don't get carried off airplanes? A wedding dress, bag of diamonds,
prosthetic leg, glass eye, underwear and handcuffs, for starters.
Crew members from 83 countries surveyed by online travel booking site Skyscanner reported finding
different animals -- a parrot, frog, falcon, tortoise -- as well as random items such as a box of dried
fish, a wig and a toupee, even a written marriage proposal.
Of course, more mundane things get left behind too. Of the 700 cabin crew members surveyed, 24%
said they found passports, 23% found cellphones and 21% found books.
Lost items can be overwhelming for airlines too. U.S. carrier Southwest Airlines says 10,000 to
13,000 items are turned in to its lost and found office every month, a newspaper reported earlier this
year. Cellphones and reading glasses topped the list of items left behind, most often in the seat-back
pocket of the airplane.
Then there's all that forgotten loot. In 2012 travelers left more than $500,000 in loose change
behind at Transportation Security Administration checkpoints in airports, up $45,000 from 2011
figures. (They get to keep it too if they can't find the rightful owners.)
What can you do to be less forgetful? Maybe pick your travel dates carefully. Data backup company
Mozy says things most often go missing at 6 p.m. on Saturdays in December. And the most common
item you can expect to lose is your cellphone.
What have you left behind on an airplane or in the airport?
http://www.latimes.com/travel/deals/la-trb-items-left-on-planes-20130820,0,5805166.story
Back to Top
GRADUATE RESEARCH SURVEY
Commercial Airline Pilot Informal Learning Survey-Request for Participant's,
Recent aviation accidents have highlighted the need to understand all aspects of commercial airline
pilot training and learning. The Federal Aviation Administration's 2010 Call to Action recognized that
current pilot training practices may need to be modified or changed. The one-size fits all approach to
pilot training may no longer be sufficient in today's aviation environment. While there have been
numerous studies on commercial airline pilots' formal learning, little is known about pilots informal
learning activities, perceptions of informal learning, and opinions on how airlines should support
informal learning. This study intends to answer those questions.
If you are currently US part 121 commercial airline pilot, please take a few minutes to let us know
how you learn outside of the training center. The survey is anonymous and should take
approximately 10 - 15 minutes to complete. Click here to access the survey, or you can paste the
link into your browser: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/FMDFJRM
Please note that the results of the study will be aggregated and will be available upon request at the
conclusion of the study.
For more information, or to receive a paper copy of the survey, please contact the researcher below.
Thank you for your time.
Kevin Corns
Principle Investigator
Capella University
kcorns2@capellauniversity.edu
Curt Lewis